There is no such thing as a bad boy.

In the name of the holy Flying Spaghetti Monster what the hell are the editors of the print edition of the Oregonian thinking? The headline to this article on parents who murdered their fifteen-month-old daughter by treating her pneumonia with faith healing reads: "When Secular and Spiritual Laws Collide."

Hey Big-O! This country is not Iran. Our legal system is not built around Sharia law. There is no such thing in this country as "spiritual law." None. Zippo. Nada.

You might as well headline the article "When Secular Law and Tinkerbell Collide." It would be just as grounded in reality.

The laws of the United States, of which the last time I checked Oregon was a participating state, are secular. Period.

I'm hoping those secular laws run over these parents doing about 75 mph then back up and make sure they're finished just for good measure.

So you lied to me! And you admit it without shame!

For longer than I can remember the readers of Oregon's only daily newspaper have had to suffer through the insipid mental driveling of conservative columnist David Reinhard. Reinhard was sort of a cross between George Will (sans intellect) and Rush Limbaugh (sans attempts at humor.) Talentless, humorless and lazy, Reinhard's columns read like he'd taken the words directly off the GOP blast fax for the day and simply rearranged them into something he could loosely call his own.

Reinhard seemed to exist on the pages of the Oregonian for one reason only- to maintain, along with liberal columnist David Sarasohn, the faux sense of balance so popular among the media these days. A balance, I might add, that tries to level right wing fantasy with center left moderation. To this end Reinhard excelled at his job- peppering his column with easily dis proven lies both big and small.

So it was with cautious optimism that I greeted the announcement just before the end of the year that Reinhard was retiring his column. Surely this action signaled a recognition by the Oregonian that the country, and their metro readership, had grown tired of the right-wing pablum that has poisoned the public discourse over the course of the last few years. The paper would have to acknowledge that the America of Barack Obama would be vastly different than the American of George W. Bush.

Unfortunately, when faced with these new realities the Oregonian opted instead to paint the pig. They hired "independent" and "center-right" columnist Elizabeth Hovde to fill Reinhard's two right shoes. She begins with the paint--

Like many people in this great, green, soggy region of independents, I am not partisan. Subscribing to the platform of just one political party feels as awkward as dressing up for church in Portland, a city where many pastors preach in jeans.

She's just a regular Tom McCall. Only less partisan.

How does she define this independent, non-partisan POV of hers?

I am conservative, however. I'm pro-life. I am anti-bailouts. I think unions are outdated, overly political and that every state should have a right-to-work law ending compulsory unionism. I oppose Oregon's Death With Dignity Act; I oppose even calling it the "Death With Dignity" Act. I am skeptical of some of Portland's Smart Growth policies and believe they've helped create massive sprawl just across the river.

She is anti-woman, anti-union, anti-land use and anti-personal/ regional responsibility.

I worry that many public schools teach sex education in ways that undermine parents. It's maddening to me that minors can't get tattoos in Oregon but they can receive abortions without a parent's knowledge, care or guidance. I grow weary of government safety nets that not only comfort those in true need but also become hammocks for those with an ability to be self-sufficient.

She believes strongly that one should keep one's head firmly up one's ass when dealing with the realities of teen pregnancy. She further believes that it would be better for the poor to die and decrease the surplus population.

I believe government's job is to support an equality of opportunity rather than an equality of outcome. That's why President-elect Barack Obama's talk about being your brother's keeper scares me silly, and his cradle-to-grave vision for education makes me clutch my wallet. At the same time, I feel hopeful when he speaks and am glad he's rejuvenated so many Americans.

She thinks Obama is a socialist and taxes are teh bad.

I supported the Iraq invasion in 2003. Heck, I even voted for George W. Bush -- twice.

This speaks for itself.

It's ridiculous that the Oregonian would replace one intellectually lazy, conservative dimwit who wears their stupidity like a badge of honor with another who shares 99% of the same views but calls herself an "independent" and then try and pass that off as change. It's more of the same and it's an insult to their mostly center-left readership which they continue to refuse to cater to.

I used to be sad at the prospect of traditional print newspapers going the way of the dodo. Not anymore. It's become clearer and clearer that they have no one to blame but themselves for their situation. They treat their customers like morons and then are surprised when their customers start looking to alternate outlets of information, most notably the Internet, to get their news. Feigning surprise at this turn of events just makes them all the more pathetic.

We'll begin with a reign of terror, a few murders here and there, murders of great men, murders of little men, just to show we make no distinction!

While we were enjoying the beauty of the Oregon coast the jackasses that call themselves the Editorial Board at the state's one and only news daily the Oregonian were embarrassing themselves again by endorsing Gordon Smith's re-election to the U.S. Senate for a third term.

I assume this goes to the Oregonian's continued warped sense of "balance" since they had endorsed Barack Obama the day before. Objectivity requires splitting the baby right down the middle. They have readers in the blue and the red part of the state after all. Except they really don't...

Like most states Oregon has concentrated population areas around big cities surrounded by larger tracts of rural, sparsely populated counties and towns. The urban area of Oregon stretches down through the Willamette Valley from Portland to Eugene. This is the area of the state viewed with derision by many rural Oregonians because it's generally more progressive and tends to favor Democrats. It also happens to be the area where the bulk of the Oregonian's readership resides.

When the Oregonian pulls one of these bone-headed stunts such as endorsing George W. Bush over Al Gore or, more recently, publishing the anti-Islamic "Obsession" video and now endorsing Smith they're directly insulting their readers. They're saying to their readers that those that run the paper are smarter than those that pay to read it.

What business can survive by insulting it's customers in such a direct manner and on such a regular basis? If you went to a deli where you were told you couldn't have the tuna because "people who eat tuna are morons" would you go back to that place?

As the readership of the Oregonian continues to decline I'm sure they'll have all sorts of excuses as to what's killing their business. They'll blame the rise of cable/ satellite. They'll finger the Internet. They'll claim it's the rise of progressive partisanship made it impossible to sell papers.

The answer will be much simpler. They simply aren't catering to their customers.

A man who tells lies, like me, merely hides the truth. But a man who tells half-lies has forgotten where he put it.

The talk yesterday around my house was why in the hell the Oregonian had agreed to distribute copies of the anti-islamic video Obsession: Radical Islam’s War Against the West to it's subscribers.

(This DVD video now serves as a coaster on our coffee table by the way. )

Apparently we're a little late to the party on this video as it appears this controversy's been brewing for a while nationally and locally. In Portland the mayor actually asked the publisher of the Oregonian Fred Stickel not to put the inserts in the paper.

The mayor's office said he wrote to the publisher of the paper: "The Mayor reviewed the video and personally asked Fred Stickel, Oregonian publisher, not to distribute it in next Sunday's issue. The Mayor felt that the tenor of the video contributes towards a climate of distrust towards Muslims that holds the entire Muslim community accountable for the actions of a dangerously misguided few. Distributing with the Oregonian lends the video an impression of objectivity and legitimacy it does not deserve."

Of course Stickel refused and published the paper with the video advertisment anyway--

The report by Bill Graves revealed that Fred Stickel, publisher of The Oregonian, said the newspaper is treating the DVD as it does other paid advertising or product inserts.

"I've always felt we have an obligation to keep our advertising columns as open as possible," said Stickel, after viewing the DVD. "Our acceptance of anything -- our acceptance or rejection -- does not depend on whether or not we agree with the content. . . . There is a principle of freedom of speech involved here. I could find no reason to reject this."

With this in mind I'm sending the following letter to the advertising editor at the Oregonian--

To Whom It May Concern:

I am a filmmaker that has recently completed my first feature length film entitled "Hitler Was Misunderstood, But Even If He Wasn't He Was Right Anyway." The video is entirely educational. I would like to include free DVD copies in the Sunday edition of the paper. What would be the cost of that? Also; I see from your website that you have no restrictions on content. Nevertheless I will keep the swastikas on the video cover small.

Yours under the First Amendment,

Feldwebel Wormer

If you want a serious response to this garbage check out this website.

UPDATE: PJ points out there was also attack against a mosque this last weekend. I suppose that's another example of Stickel's Free Speech.

Today, I consider myself the luckiest man on the face of the earth.

This front page story in the Big O about an awesome act of sportsmanship this last weekend left me a little choked up--

"At the plate, Tucholsky concentrated on ignoring the wise guys. She took strike one. And then the senior did something she had never done before -- even in batting practice. The career .153 hitter smashed the next pitch over the center field fence for an apparent three-run home run.

The exuberant former high school point guard sprinted to first. As she reached the bag, she looked up to watch the ball clear the fence and missed first base. Six feet past the bag, she stopped abruptly to return and touch it. But something gave in her right knee; she collapsed on the base path.

"I was in a lot of pain," she told The Oregonian on Tuesday. "Our first-base coach was telling me I had to crawl back to first base. 'I can't touch you,' she said, 'or you'll be out. I can't help you.' "

Tucholsky, to the horror of teammates and spectators, crawled through the dirt and the pain back to first.

Western coach Pam Knox rushed onto the field and talked to the umpires near the pitcher's mound. The umpires said Knox could place a substitute runner at first. Tucholsky would be credited with a single and two RBIs, but her home run would be erased.

"The umpires said a player cannot be assisted by their team around the bases," Knox said. "But it is her only home run in four years. She is going to kill me if we sub and take it away. But at same time I was concerned for her. I didn't know what to do. . . .

"That is when Mallory stepped in."

Mallory Holtman is the greatest softball player in Central Washington history. Normally when the conference's all-time home run leader steps up to the plate, Pam Knox and other conference coaches grimace.

But on senior day, the first baseman volunteered a simple, selfless solution to her opponents' dilemma: What if the Central Washington players carried Tucholsky around the bases?

The umpires said nothing in the rule book precluded help from the opposition. Holtman asked her teammate junior shortstop and honors program student Liz Wallace of Florence, Mont., to lend a hand. The teammates walked over and picked up Tucholsky and resumed the home-run walk, pausing at each base to allow Tucholsky to touch the bag with her uninjured leg.

"We started laughing when we touched second base," Holtman said. "I said, 'I wonder what this must look like to other people.' "

Holtman got her answer when they arrived at home plate. She looked up and saw the entire Western Oregon team in tears.

"My whole team was crying," Tucholsky said. "Everybody in the stands was crying. My coach was crying. It touched a lot of people."

People like to quote Vince Lombardi's "winning isn't everything, it's the only thing" speech at every opportunity. I've never agreed with that sentiment (neither did Lombardi who insisted he was misquoted.)

These young women at Sunday's softball game exemplified what sports are really about. It's a hell of a lot more than just winning. Among other things it's character. They have it in spades.

Doesn't it do anything but snow up here? We've had a blizzard every day for the past two months.

Amongst the myriad of proof signifying the increase in global warming I'd like to point you towards a couple of stories. The first was in today's Big O entitled Big, wet storms may become new 'normal.'

The steamy tropical belt around Earth's midsection, birthplace of the powerful storm that pounded the Northwest this week, is expanding much faster than scientists studying global warming expected.

It's now as wide as climate models suggested it would be at the end of this century, new research shows. The rapid growth is another sign that bigger storms carrying more rain may become the new "normal" in the Northwest, especially in fall and early winter.

Snabby's been blogging about the recent Storm of the Century(tm)
this week. Apparently those of us in the Northwest are going to see more of this. So we got that going for us.

Perhaps more troubling are the findings of NFL Meteorologists- NFL Meteorologists Warn Steaming Black-Guy Heads Occurring Later Every Year.

NEW YORK—Steaming black-guy heads, the traditional sign of approaching winter for generations of football fans, have been occurring later in the season with every passing year, a fact that may be evidence of a climatic change with long-term effects on football itself, top scientists in the meteorological department of the National Football League said in a study released Monday.

"The phenomenon of weather-related African-American supracranial vaporous emission, or 'Steaming Black-Guy Heads,' as it is colloquially known, occurs when cold dry winter air comes into contact with hot, humid, shaven heads of football players, causing their personal water vapor to condense and rise on a column of heated air," the statement read in part. "It is then observed by network cameramen, who overwhelmingly choose to film African-American players due to the dramatic contrasts that result—especially when the player in question is backlit—and beamed to millions of households during time-outs, replay reviews, and other stoppages of play. The viewers then realize that winter has come to America."

Will it be possible for even George W. Bush to ignore this latest scientific evidence? Only time will tell.

Wonder what they'd have done to Columbus if he'd discovered America, and then mislaid it.

Unintentionally funny quote of the day from Victor Davis Hanson in today's opinion page in the Big O:

"Too often Congress and it's wayward members decide they're smarter at foreign affairs than President Bush. "

The problem in which members of congress decide they're smarter than Bush on foreign affairs isn't limited to wayward members of congress. It's extends to small children, other primates and certain inanimate objects including pencils.

In fact; had we simply flipped a coin at every important foreign policy juncture over the last six years we would've been better off as a country than having the drooling moron in the oval office and his track record of utter, complete failure make foreing policy decisions.

Power - to make the multitudes run squealing in terror!

Just sent off to the Oregonian:

Dear Mr. Caldwell,

Like so many of your readers I avoid reading columns by David Reinhard as a general rule. Please understand it has nothing to do with Reinhard's political affiliation. There are many fine conservative columnists including George Will and Debra Saunders who put forth valid, intellectually honest arguments advocating the conservative position on the issues of the day.

No, the problem with Mr. Reinhard is that is writing is always predictably pedestrian and completely without nuance. Reinhard writes his columns as if he's playing a game a scrabble with the text of the daily G.O.P. blast-fax. Add an adjective here, move a sentence around there and voila! Send this baby to print. For most of us it's simply easier to skip Reinhard and go directly to the source.

Against my better judgement I opened my morning paper and decided to give Reinhard yet another chance. Maybe I was missing something in those hundreds of other columns I've read. Maybe he wasn't as intellectually squishy as I remember.

In reading today's column imagine my surprise to find out that Reinhard is not only just as bad but, surprisingly, has actually regressed in his skills as a columnist. I had to read through the column twice just to confirm that Mr. Reinhard was indeed making-fun of a twelve-year-old boy. A new low for someone like Mr. Reinhard who regularly feeds on the bottom.

The Living section of the Oregonian allows for annual voting on the comics pages where readers are allowed to choose which strips the paper will run and which strips they should drop. I would like to suggest you provide this same opportunity for the readers of the Oregonian's Forum section. I realize this would mean David Reinhard would quickly be out of a job, but a bright guy like himself would surely be able to land on his feet. Or pull himself up by his bootstraps or what ever.

I would hope that you will take my suggestion in consideration,

Sincerely,

Dean Vernon Wormer

No cookie, I swear. I'm scared of you!

On the other hand this woman is so NOT my hero.

On Saturday at noon, a Portland woman was driving onto the upper level of the Fremont Bridge when she spotted a small, black ball of fur scoot across the highway.

At first, she thought it was a squirrel. But then she realized it was a kitten, so she slammed on her brakes right in the middle of traffic and scooped it up in her arms.

"I wanted to make sure it wasn't in harm's way," says Stephanie Schneiderman, who sings and plays guitar in the group Dirty Martini. "I would have preferred to have someone hit my car than hit the cat."

A cat lover, with two of her own, she took the stunned kitten to DoveLewis Emergency Animal Hospital where veterinarians thought it had an upper respiratory problem.

They suggested euthanizing it, Schneiderman says.

The 34-year-old, whom friends call "the kitty savior of the universe," took the male kitten to Tigard Animal Hospital for treatment.

Reading the article made me want Benny Hill slap her, and the two people who wrote it. The speed limit on the Fremont bridge is 55 mph. It's effectively a freeway. When she "slammed on her brakes" she put every other driver's life behind her at risk to save a cat. Nice that she would've "preferred someone hit her car other than the cat" but I'm not sure the person in the other car would see it that way. What she did is illegal, bad driving and a terrible display of common sense. No where in this article do they mention any of that.

It's not a question of enough, pal. It's a zero sum game, somebody wins, somebody loses.

There are some things the government should be doing and there are some things that are better left to the free market.

Utilities are one of those sectors that should almost always be run by the government.

In today's Business section of The Oregonian there's this little tidbit-

PGE takes on utility tax law

2006 sale - A filing argues money from equipment bought in 2001 should go to shareholders, not ratepayers.

Ratepayer advocates are voicing concerns about what they see as an attempt by Portland General Electric Co. to turn back the clock to tax accounting machinations employed by Enron and subsequently outlawed by Oregon legislators.

Filings PGE and customer groups made to utility regulators in the past week could, in fact, presage a legal challenge to a controversial tax law commonly referred to as Senate Bill 408. The 2005 law requires utilities to match the taxes that they collect from customers in rates with what they actually pay the government, and offer a refund or surcharge to customers if the gap is too large.

PGE collects taxes as part of our electric bill. The law passed by the state legislature in 2005 says that if those taxes aren't forwarded to the government in turn then they should be returned to ratepayers. This is basic, common sense to anyone outside of those who own oodles of stock in the electric utility company. The 2005 bill is about as "controversial" as the idea that you shouldn't leave your dog in your car on an August day with the windows rolled up.

PGE is giving Oregon voters the finger yet again. This is the same PGE that's continually getting stroked by the state Utilities Board that's supposed to be looking out for ratepayers as they rubber-stamp every planned rate increase by the company. They get away with this because they are a virtual monopoly so they have no free market competition and because they know how to play the political system so they have no real chance of competition from the government.

Not that legislators haven't tried to make the utility a public entity. Most recently the city of Portland tried to put together a bid to purchase the company which was thoroughly defeated by PGE and it's threatening political muscle. It's absolutely absurd that given PGEs constant abuses of Oregon ratepayers - from transferring the costs of shutting down Trojan to ratepayers to the Enron tax scam they're continuing to try and apply here - that the state hasn't privatized the wayward company. I simply cannot understand this thinking.

The idea that the free market is some sort of panacea that automatically means better service to customers, lower cost to customers and greater returns to shareholders all at the same time is just nuts. Corporations pay nothing but lip service to trying to balance those three competing interests and if they hold a monopoly on the industry not even that. Something will always suffer and it will never be the shareholder aspect of the equation.

Yet governments continue to do exactly the opposite of what would be good for citizens as they rush towards transferring public assets into the private sector without a second thought to how the customers, sorry citizens, will come out of the deal. Consider this story from Business Week-

In the past year, banks and private investment firms have fallen in love with public infrastructure. They're smitten by the rich cash flows that roads, bridges, airports, parking garages, and shipping ports generate — and the monopolistic advantages that keep those cash flows as steady as a beating heart. Firms are so enamored, in fact, that they're beginning to consider infrastructure a brand new asset class in itself.

With state and local leaders scrambling for cash to solve short-term fiscal problems, the conditions are ripe for an unprecedented burst of buying and selling. All told, some $100 billion worth of public property could change hands in the next two years, up from less than $7 billion over the past two years; a lease for the Pennsylvania Turnpike could go for more than $30 billion all by itself. "There's a lot of value trapped in these assets," says Mark Florian, head of North American infrastructure banking at Goldman, Sachs & Co.

There are some advantages to private control of roads, utilities, lotteries, parking garages, water systems, airports, and other properties. To pay for upkeep, private firms can raise rates at the tollbooth without fear of being penalized in the voting booth. Privateers are also freer to experiment with ideas like peak pricing, a market-based approach to relieving traffic jams. And governments are making use of the cash they're pulling in—balancing budgets, retiring debt, investing in social programs, and on and on.

But are investors getting an even better deal? It's a question with major policy implications as governments relinquish control of major public assets for years to come. The aggressive toll hikes embedded in deals all but guarantee pain for lower-income citizens—and enormous profits for the buyers. For example, the investors in the $3.8 billion deal for the Indiana Toll Road, struck in 2006, could break even in year 15 of the 75-year lease, on the way to reaping as much as $21 billion in profits, estimates Merrill Lynch & Co. What's more, some public interest groups complain that the revenue from the higher tolls inflicted on all citizens will benefit only a handful of private investors, not the commonwealth.

Why would investors be "clamoring" to buy these assets if they weren't worth more than what the governments that own them are raking in on these deals? Infrastructure should remain under the government's control. All of us, as well as future generations, own these assets. They are better owned and managed by the public sector.

Private industry is very good at a number of things, especially when they face competition. Shoes, jeans, soda, televisions and cars are all things that government should stay the heck out of. But when it comes to basic necessities - electricity, water and the very roads we commute daily on the government is the best, if imperfect manager, of those resources.

It was a lie. And the more I saw them, the more I hated lies.

This editorial from today's Oregonian isn't bad up until it gets to this point-

Then our senators and representatives can stop their partisan posturing and cheap political stunts -- like aiming to pass their fund-cutoff to the date of Bush's infamous declaration of the end of ground combat in Iraq. Then they can get down to the serious business of supporting the troops by seeing that they get medical care, counseling, employment and respect from the country they serve. The administration can more effectively help Iraq by sending diplomats, money, equipment, trainers and advisers.

Look, I know the model for modern journalism is to pretend every thing's equivalent in order to provide "balance" and convince the reporter they're objectively reporting facts but the bottom line is there's simply no way you could refer to the Senate's passing of the supplemental on the anniversary of Bush's "Mission Accomplished" moment as cheap. Especially when comparing it to that moment of high political theater itself.

Four years ago to the date the President declared the war won. Shouldn't we be bringing our troops home?

Boy, am I a victim of disappointment in you.

It was nice of the Big O to publish an editorial yesterday begging somebody of the stature of Earl Blumenauer or Peter Defazio to run against Gordon Smith but this bit rang a little hollow-

Of course, we're not prepared to endorse any potential challenger, nor have we reached any conclusions about Smith's re-election. But Oregon does not need another one of those incumbent coronations that are so common here and elsewhere. What we want to see is a great race, with two (or more) talented, well-funded candidates going all-out for Oregon's highest elected office.

Does anyone doubt that The Oregonian will be endorsing Smith again in the next general election no matter who his Democratic challenger is? This is the newspaper that just the day before ran an editorial slamming Pelosi for her trip to Syria that would've been right at home in the pages of the Washington Post. Their editorial board isn't exactly the font of common sense.

The prosecution would like to separate the motive from the act. Well, that's like trying to take the core from an apple without breaking the skin.

David Reinhard writes in yesterday's Big O-

Of course, it's early yet. The surge of U.S. troops won't be complete until late spring, and the enemy will react and have his bloody say. Of course, Qanbar is invested in the crackdown's success. But these and other signs of progress suggest this new "last chance" strategy has a chance of success. Good news, unless you're somehow invested in the new strategy's failure. That is, if you can even bring yourself to acknowledge there is a new strategy.

Oh sure there's a new strategy and it's working great, Dave-

7 U.S. soldiers killed in Iraq, 4 in one incident.

I would say that he has a rather limited and uncreative way of looking at the situation.

Is stupid a "pre-existing condition?"

From the letters to the editor in today's Oregonian:

Don't Cover Birth Control

Susan Nielsen, in her column of March 4, complains about the fact that she has paid for other people's medicine all her life, but nobody paid for her birth control pills. She supports House Bill 2700 which would require insurance companies that cover prescription drugs to cover birth control.

Birth control and most other medications are part of the cost of living, not a one-time huge expense that should be insured against. Insuring against the cost of living just raises the cost of living, as the insurance companies have to have their cut: they are not about to lose money.

The problem is not that Nielsen's birth control hasn't been paid for by insurance all these years, but that she has forced to pay for other people's medicine.

Once an expense is expected, it is uninsurable. That is what pre-existing conditions are all about in health insurance. Fertility is a pre-existing condition.

Rycke Brown, Grants Pass

There's almost too much stupid here to tackle at once. I feel a bit like a hungry gator that's come upon a wounded hippo.

I guess I could point out to Mr. Brown that impotence is expected once men reach a certain age yet insurance companies insure the cost of medicine to treat that condition just the same.

Or I could point out that there's all sorts of medical reasons women take birth control pills that have nothing to do with preventing pregnancy.

While we're on the subject of pregnancy it doesn't appear that Mr. Brown has done the cost-benefit math on insurance costs. Hint: is it more expensive to the insurer to provide birth control pills or pre and post natal care? Not to mention the cost of the delivery itself? Remember that insurance companies aren't about to lose their cut.

As Atrios is fond of saying- The stupid! It burns!

(above image/ quote chosen especially for Hypatia)

You sit around here and you spin your little webs and you think the whole world revolves around you and your money.

The last second flood of Measure 37 claims has sent the state into a bit of a panic but has at least provided a bit of grim amusement in watching the Oregonian expressing shock, SHOCK, that corporations might take advantage of a ballot initiative they largely funded the passage of. Not the sharpest tools in the shed over there at the Lazy O.

More sympathetic are the small rural communities which strongly supported Measure 37 that are now running smack dab into the law of unintended consequences. The media has focused on coastal communities near to large tracts of corporate owned timber that may face development under Measure 37 claims but that's not the end of the story. For example:

Sandy received its first claim from Lila C. Leathers, who says her downtown property is hurt by a ban on gas stations and drive-through restaurants.

In other words: a truck stop.

The Sandy downtown is really a small, oval shaped island that splits Highway 26 East and West on both sides. Traffic on the highway is slowed to 25 mph in town and, during the winter ski months when the traffic is particularly heavy, it can be a real bear getting through town.

Leather's property is on the West end of that island bordering Highway 26 on both sides. The truck stop she's been fighting to build would no doubt add considerable traffic problems to the surrounding area as tractor trailers merged back onto the highway. That's why the notoriously development-friendly city have wisely spiked her efforts up to this point. A truck stop would not be beneficial for the local community nor the seasonal travelers that depend on the highway to get up the mountain. Sandy, which bills itself as the "Gateway to Mt. Hood," would become more gate than gateway.

The Governor and legislative leaders are discussing some "tweaking" of Measure 37 during the next session. Most likely something will come together that caps the larger, corporate claims while expediting the smaller individual claims. I would hope the Leathers deal falls into the former category because the benefit to Sandy, and to all all Oregonians that enjoy their winter sports, is negligible to say the least.

I love you. However, I hate you.

The thing that really stands out in The Oregonian's ridiculous endorsement of Republican challenger Ron Saxton over Governor Ted Kulongoski is how intelletually dishonest the reasoning is. They begin by correctly identify many of the issues facing the state:

This state has slipped and fallen. School funding is below the national average. Oregon is near the bottom in public support of universities. The number of troopers patrolling highways is only half of what the state mustered 30 years ago. Oregon's system of public finance is a mess, and Oregon, virtually alone among states, has no rainy day fund.

Which leads them naturally to endorse the man who will exasperate all of these problems.

Kulongoski is not a great Governor. He seems unwilling to use the Governor's office as a bully pulpit and all too willing to throw up his hands, point at the Republican controlled state house and claim he can't do anything.

But Saxton? He's clearly not interested in adequately funding state schools, refuses to say where he stands on the number of state troopers Oregon maintains (House Republicans would actually like to REDUCE the number of troopers) and continues to support the kicker which is the biggest obstacle to a rainy day fund.

But on a larger sense we simply can no longer afford to elect Republicans to any office. The party - as it's currently constituted - is simply too regimented and too wrong on the important issues to allow for the individual conscious of it's candidates. Paul Krugman writes today in the New York Times that "...this is a one-letter election. D or R, that's all that matters." I wish I could disagree.

I also wish Fred Stickel and the rest of the editorial board at the Oregonian understood that.

I came over for a snoop, uh, a scoop of sugar. I hope I'm not disturbing you.

This column in yesterday's Oregonian pretty much made my head explode.

School bus drivers being trained to watch for terrorism signs

4/18/2006, 12:00 a.m. PT
The Associated Press

PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) — School bus drivers and transportation officials across the state are being trained to spot possible terrorists and other signs of danger.

The training, given to more than 1,000 Oregonians so far, is part of the national School Bus Watch program, which teaches drivers to identify, evaluate and report suspicious activities around school buses and along bus routes.

Bus drivers are taught to look for little signals that something could be awry: For example, a man at a bus stop wearing a long trench coat on a hot summer day; a person photographing students boarding or departing; a person videotaping school buses from a freeway overpass or sketching the layout of school buildings.

The online version of the article appears to be annotated with much of the money quotes that appeared in the print version conspicously absent. The fact that the program is part of a $50 million dollar Department of Homeland Security grant is missing from the portion I linked.

$50 million dollars that could have gone to mounting geiger-counters on every crane at every port in the U.S. but instead went to training school bus drivers in the hinterland to spot junior-jihadists who sneak onto their buses.

You'd be surprised to know that thus far the program hasn't turned up any terrorist plots but I can just imagine the interview with the first bus driver that breaks a al-qaeda cell: "He was a kid I'd never seen ride the bus before, see. I could just tell he was up to something and not just because he was six feet tall with a full-on beard."

At one point the print version of the article mentions some of the how-to-spot-an-evildoer-training was conducted for average citizens in Medford. Medford. The number one target on Bin Laden's operation map, I'm sure.

Get over you bad selves, Medford. Nobody, least of all the enemies of the United States, care about you.

This is another telling graf:

Tom Slavin, a veteran school bus driver for Portland Public Schools who is also certified to train bus drivers, said the program teaches drivers to be observers, not law enforcement officers. Slavin said all drivers volunteering for the training program must go through an extensive criminal background check but are not required to sign a loyalty oath.

No loyalty oath? That is SO pre-9/11. Loyalty oaths are all the rage these days.

What the heck would they swear loyalty to? Good driving? Bus safety? Not throttling the noisy little brats?

I'm actually am fairly close to someone that's been through this training for bus drivers. One of the things they're taught is that if they suspect someone of preparing to do something nefarious to a bus they should radio in a secret code and continue business as usual until law enforcement determines what to do. In other words: if you suspect someone has a bomb on the bus keep picking up students in case they suspect you're on to them and set off the bomb.

Only the Bush administration could come up with something that asinine.